Plenty of industry heavyweights were active at the Mobile World Congress (MWC) last week, but there was a very noticeable, major absence: Google. The company's invisibility in Barcelona was a microcosm for perhaps the biggest trend coming out of the conference: co-option—companies seemingly adopting existing brands as their own.

Sure, Intel (keen to promote the Android compatibility of its new Clover Trail Plus platform) proudly showcased its Google partnership. The company had various poor souls dressed as green robots with Intel Inside badges. The company even had some at the Barcelona airport, and an alarming number of conference attendees were keen to have their photo taken with the robot.

But everyone else? Their smartphones may have been running Android, but you'd never know it. "Android" isn't a feature. It's barely even a footnote. The identity of these phones is Samsung, HTC, Sony, LG—not Android. Google's invisibility from MWC mirrored Android's invisibility from the handsets.

Google hasn't exactly helped promote the Android brand, with its (in some ways) competing "Nexus" and "Play" brands, but it's no wonder that Google is reported to be fearful of Samsung's dominance. It's arguably not a problem that Google should ignore, either, as it's impeding Google's ability to improve the platform. For example, Google long ago switched to a new button layout (from left-to-right: back/home/multitasking), but Samsung's devices stick with the old one (menu/home/back), which is less convenient and meshes poorly with new applications. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising if Samsung stuck with the old layout in the Galaxy S IV.

Nokia too is co-opting a brand, though this time it's the Windows Phone brand. It does get some mention, but as we've noted before, "Lumia" is the brand with name recognition, not "Windows Phone." In Microsoft's case, the tight control of the underlying platform precludes the kind of inconsistency and inconvenience that afflicts Android, so it's less of an immediate concern. It could prove troublesome in the long term, however, as it makes it that much harder for other companies, such as HTC, to bring Windows Phone devices to market.

There’s no obvious way for Google to reclaim Android.

To these, we now have Ubuntu from Canonical and Firefox OS from Mozilla to add into the mix. Both open source operating systems were on display, with Mozilla boasting a number of design wins for its HTML5-driven platform. Being open source—and likely more open than Android, which is substantially developed in private before a source drop is dumped on an unsuspecting world each time a new version is released—puts these platforms at the same risk.

Although both Mozilla and Canonical protect their trademarks in various ways, it would seem relatively straightforward for someone to take either platform, slap on their own name and branding, and call it their own (similar to the way Ubuntu already co-opts Debian). We asked Mark Shuttleworth, CEO of Canonical, and Mitchell Baker, chair of the Mozilla foundation, what they would do to prevent this. Both argued that, essentially, being co-opted was fine. It's all in the spirit of open source.

The problem is that third parties could develop the platforms in undesirable ways. For example, native applications could be grafted onto Firefox OS, undermining its HTML5 concept. Firefox OS is Mozilla's hedge against the rise of the app and the marginalization of the Web: someone slapping native apps onto it would be a big blow.

While MWC's path back to its roots is clear and the transformation seems to be under way already, there's no obvious way for Google to reclaim Android. A stable of strong Motorola handsets might enable the company to push things in that direction, but so far it has resisted doing even this. Motorola's handsets are not Nexus handsets. Come 2014, it would be no great surprise to find the last vestiges of the Android name gone forever.

Endangered at MWC: Flagship releases

In one form or another, Mobile World Congress has been around for more than a quarter of a century.

In theory, it's a giant trade show organized by the GSM Association, a group of 800 mobile operators and more than 200 handset makers, network hardware companies, and media companies. The event is designed so that these entities can get together, hawk their wares to each other, and trade views on the state of the industry. It's for people in the business to talk to their peers from around the world.

As with another big trade show, CES, MWC has become something more than that. With the rise of the smartphone in particular, the event has been used to announce important products not just to people in the industry but to the mainstream media as a whole. This has tended to overshadow the other aspects of the show, at least as far as press coverage goes.

For example, at the show last year, Nokia unveiled the 41MP 808 PureView and a world edition of the Lumia 900. Samsung used the 2011 event to officially unveil the Galaxy S II. The same year, LG announced the Optimus 3D, a device that was, for a time, the company's flagship.

This year things were a little different. HTC decided to launch the HTC One at a press conference the week before the event. LG likewise announced the Optimus G Pro the week before MWC. Samsung went one better, announcing on the first day of MWC—but not at MWC—that its Galaxy S IV event would take place mid-March in New York City.

Nokia did announce some new phones, but not the high-end flagship some were hoping for. Rather, the company revealed a pair of Windows Phone 8 handsets, one mid-range, one low-end, and a pair of feature phones for emerging markets.

This too is similar to what we've seen at CES. Microsoft announced in late 2011 that CES 2012 would be the last time the software giant gave the opening keynote presentation. Redmond said that CES was a poor fit for its release schedule, so splurging on a big presence wasn't worthwhile.

Sony announced the PlayStation 4 at its own event, not CES. Microsoft is expected to have its own Xbox "Next" event in April instead of piggybacking off E3 in June. Apple, of course, launches all its products at its own events and never bothers with these industry shows.

Signs are that MWC is going to evolve in the same way. It will be important for the industry and important for companies without the name recognition that the likes of Samsung and Motorola have. But what it won't be is a major launch event for major products.

There was some hedging of bets by some attendees. Samsung did launch a device at MWC (or at least, the day before MWC), with the Galaxy Note 8. Sony announced its slimline Xperia Tablet Z. HP followed Samsung, announcing its Slate 7 the day before MWC started. Clearly, being part of the MWC news cycle was still seen as desirable for these smaller announcements.

Enlarge/ Booths in the convention center's eight halls ranged from the tiny to the enormous—Samsung's booth was one of the larger ones, and there were dozens of tablets and phones arranged on tables (usually attached to hulking anti-theft devices).

Andrew Cunningham

At MWC itself, Samsung, LG, HTC, Motorola, and Nokia all had substantial stands, as did companies trying to enter the European and North American consciousness such as Huawei. Their stands were all furnished with dozens of their new devices (with the exception of HP's stand; for reasons that escape me, the Slate 7 seemed to be AWOL save for a unit locked away in a display case). If you're a major phone builder, being seen at MWC still matters.

Strikingly absent were Microsoft, BlackBerry (née RIM), and Google. Microsoft and RIM had both booked hotels for their own private events. Microsoft had nothing to say, and BlackBerry launched its new operating system and phones just a few weeks ago.

This is probably the future of MWC. It's the future of CES, too. Both events will return to their trade show roots, with mainstream news taking place elsewhere.

I've been saying this for a couple of years, but people are buying Nexus (my choice), Samsung, HTC, or Motorola phones, not an Android phone. I think that's how it's supposed to be. Google should be okay with it, as long as its Nexus (or Droid from Motorola) phones have non-insignificant market share.

Android itself is definitely not a feature, but Google Play (App) Store is. I don't think there is a viable alternate app market on Android. I don't think Amazon can be it.

Think about it. The article's argument applies to Windows as well.. especially until about 2010, virtually no one knew what an operating system was, or that there was anything beyond Windows, or that it was even a piece of software. They just assumed it was burned into the computer. Techie people always knew, but the average user just didn't care enough to know. Education on this matter has increased significantly since then, but as it is, the last thing a laptop builder wants to emphasize is that they're running Windows... especially since customers so greatly fear Windows 8.

The manufactures just want to shove shitty appliance phones out by the truckload as cheap and disposable as possible. They’ve never really been on board with or understood smartphones; they’re still in the mindset of throw away dumb phones, and they're just shipping with Android instead of S40 or whatever so they can “me too” the features of iPhone.

It’s a shame because Android is better than iOS in a number of ways, but the non-Nexus phones keeping getting fucked up by the manufacturer and carrier asshats.

I welcome the day when I can put any number of Operating systems on my latest handheld hardware. I don't think the handset makers have any incentive and/or reason to promote the OS as long as that OS can use the hardware in the handheld.

I've seen a perceptible, tiny, but perceptible uptick in Windows Phone acquisitions among my social group.

I have noticed that fandom seems to have fallen off: neither my iPhone or Android using friends seem to love their devices like they used to...they like them well enough, and that's it.

Maybe there's an opening for MS.

It's true. I have no love for Android or iOS, and I think Windows Phone is impractical. If ever there was a time for a new product to step in, this is it. I can't wait for Ubuntu Phone, that's something which might be a practical and better platform than what we have now.

Google could just offer OEMs a larger kickback/lower fee for selling straight Android instead of embellishing with a custom presentation layer.

Also offer incentives for following HW guidelines, like button layout or placement, as well as bundling of Google Services.

Finally offer something like $1 per phone for every OS update pushed through to 'share the wealth' of providing a large and modern install base.

Actually I'd almost say offer a sliding scale based on how close the ROM is to vanilla. So, as an example, Sense and Touchpiss overlays would get virtually nothing and with Samsung's deviation from even the hardware standard for buttons they would get zero and possibly a smack in the face.

Google developed and pushed Android so that Apple wouldn't have total world domination. They've accomplished that much. They don't need to crack down on vendors just because it's not exactly what they want. They don't need total control of the platform, like Apple does.

If any of the Android vendors goes completely off the reservation, Google still has a big club. Google licenses the Play Store and all their apps, like maps, navigation, gmail, voice recognition. and more. Customers will expect all those to be available, and any phone that doesn't have them will get a big drop in sales and high return rate. But you can't un-ring that bell, so they need to reserve that for only extremely nasty behavior, like incompatibility.

Besides, Google helped to make Samsung the top vendor that they are. All the Google Nexus phones were Samsung's models, until recently with LG. Google can still play king-maker. Maybe merge their Motorola division with another phone maker, and choose their phones for flagship status, and Samsung will really have to fight to compete.

Personally, I hope Canonical doesn't screw up with Ubuntu phone. I'd love to have a real, full computer in my hands that can run all my desktop X11 apps with just a recompile, rather than just a pretty good thin client, which is the best I can say for Android...

If any of the Android vendors goes completely off the reservation, Google still has a big club. Google licenses the Play Store and all their apps, like maps, navigation, gmail, voice recognition. and more. Customers will expect all those to be available, and any phone that doesn't have them will get a big drop in sales and high return rate. But you can't un-ring that bell, so they need to reserve that for only extremely nasty behavior, like incompatibility.

Besides, Google helped to make Samsung the top vendor that they are. All the Google Nexus phones were Samsung's models, until recently with LG. Google can still play king-maker. Maybe merge their Motorola division with another phone maker, and choose their phones for flagship status, and Samsung will really have to fight to compete.

The 2nd and 3rd Nexus phones were by Samsung; the first was by HTC. But yeah, your point still stands, except I don’t think Google can just decide to merge Motorola with someone else, nor would it help. Motorola needs to do the same thing as everyone else who isn’t Samsung: get good phones onto multiple carriers.

I wonder what Google would do with its apps if Samsung went on its own way (which I don’t expect in the short term). Google offers its services to iOS, where Gmail (the service, not the app) is pretty much the norm. Their maps are popular among iPhone users. Would they do the same for a theoretical Samsung OS? Probably; it’d be too many people to ignore, and it’d be best to get in among them while Samsung’s equivalents were still weak.

Google developed and pushed Android so that Apple wouldn't have total world domination. They've accomplished that much. They don't need to crack down on vendors just because it's not exactly what they want. They don't need total control of the platform, like Apple does.

Not good enough.

If the choice is well made iOS vs. a shit smart phone OS, then Apple deserves to have world domination, and we should all support them.

But that is not the choice. Android is not the shit also ran OS. It’s better than iOS in some ways, worse in others, but the point is that Android is very good so there is no reason for anyone to have a shitty phone experience. But some people are getting a shitty phone experience because the vendors won’t stop fucking around with Android.

Stop with the shitty skins and ship the goddamn OS updates on schedule, and if they’re too lazy or incompetent to do that, then maybe Google does need to crack down on them.

This is nothing new and a continuing problem for Android boosters, as Ars itself explained in their earlier article about Google fearing Samsung dominance. For phones, t's basically a Samsung vs iPhone race with consumers thinking "Samsung Galaxy" not "Android," and in tablets it's Kindle vs iPad where the Kindle buries the Android brand so that it's Amazon's Kindle brand that gets into people heads, not Google's.

At least with Samsung, Google still wins in a way because they still get the ad revenue and all your data that are belong to the Google ecosystem.

This is very sad. I use Android, but I might not for much longer. If the Android splits into two camps, a "Android-based but branded and skinned" camp, and the Nexus camp, which gives a stock experience but forces you to depend upon a constantly available connection by pushing you towards cloud storage and preventing microSD expansion, then it's "bubye" time. Alternate ROMs aren't generally good enough for me, given problematic driver support for cameras and special features like the Note S-pen.

I want the BOTH ability to have a stock Android experience, and the ability expand my storage and work effectively offline. Lose those, you lose me.

Google could just offer OEMs a larger kickback/lower fee for selling straight Android instead of embellishing with a custom presentation layer.

Also offer incentives for following HW guidelines, like button layout or placement, as well as bundling of Google Services.

Finally offer something like $1 per phone for every OS update pushed through to 'share the wealth' of providing a large and modern install base.

Kickback? Fee? Manufacturers don't pay Google a dime for Android. It's open source, and given away for free by Google. The manufacturers make money on the hardware (and any associated subscription services used by their devices), and Google makes money by serving ads to anyone using Google services (Search, Maps, Gmail, Youtube, etc.).

Google could just offer OEMs a larger kickback/lower fee for selling straight Android instead of embellishing with a custom presentation layer.

Also offer incentives for following HW guidelines, like button layout or placement, as well as bundling of Google Services.

Finally offer something like $1 per phone for every OS update pushed through to 'share the wealth' of providing a large and modern install base.

Where is the money for the kickbacks and fees when android is free for these OEMs and Google doesn't get paid a license fee for Android? Maybe google should strike a patent license agreement with Microsoft to avoid all the OEMs paying the "android tax" for using patented tech in the OS.

Google could just offer OEMs a larger kickback/lower fee for selling straight Android instead of embellishing with a custom presentation layer.

Also offer incentives for following HW guidelines, like button layout or placement, as well as bundling of Google Services.

Finally offer something like $1 per phone for every OS update pushed through to 'share the wealth' of providing a large and modern install base.

Where is the money for the kickbacks and fees when android is free for these OEMs and Google doesn't get paid a license fee for Android? Maybe google should strike a patent license agreement with Microsoft to avoid all the OEMs paying the "android tax" for using patented tech in the OS.

A better idea: Google should take the extortion money they would pay Microsoft, and use it to fund an aggressive troll-fighting entity that would kick Microsoft in the nuts.

No one is excited about phones anymore. It was a big deal initially when there was a lot of "oohh... ahhh" factor when phones began to do some amazing things. It was shinny enough that people were blinded by the kinds of bullshit carriers were doing to them.

The bullshit with "unlimited" plans, the lock-ins, the need to dispute your bill every. fucking. month. On and so on eroding every bit of shininess away until people find themselves wanting just a basic "dumb" phone. It's hard to get excited when you feel like everything is a BOHCA trap for your monthly bill.

My mom doesn't want to use any apps at all because she's afraid of what it might do to her bill. She'll just wait until she gets home and use her PC or tablet (her tablet with no connection to a cell network.) I can't say that I blame her at all. It's very liberating to use devices that aren't locked into a "plan" that could go ape shit at any moment and cost you hundreds of dollars.

This is very sad. I use Android, but I might not for much longer. If the Android splits into two camps, a "Android-based but branded and skinned" camp, and the Nexus camp, which gives a stock experience but forces you to depend upon a constantly available connection by pushing you towards cloud storage and preventing microSD expansion, then it's "bubye" time. Alternate ROMs aren't generally good enough for me, given problematic driver support for cameras and special features like the Note S-pen.

I want the BOTH ability to have a stock Android experience, and the ability expand my storage and work effectively offline. Lose those, you lose me.

I've owned most major (Samsung) devices since the Galaxy S and there's never been a problem getting very functional "Alternate ROMs" that have all the advantages of the Nexus phones but also include a microSD slot. The worst was GPS support on the Galaxy S, but that hardly worked with the stock ROM. Cameras have always worked and the S-pen had better support in Cyanogenmod than the stock ROM for the Note (it supported hovering cursor).

If you're someone who cares about getting the best possible Android then Cyanogenmod and its friends won't let you down.

No one is excited about phones anymore. It was a big deal initially when there was a lot of "oohh... ahhh" factor when phones began to do some amazing things. It was shinny enough that people were blinded by the kinds of bullshit carriers were doing to them.

The bullshit with "unlimited" plans, the lock-ins, the need to dispute your bill every. fucking. month. On and so on eroding every bit of shininess away until people find themselves wanting just a basic "dumb" phone. It's hard to get excited when you're feel like everything is a BOHCA trap for your monthly bill.

My mom doesn't want to use any apps at all because she's afraid of what it might do to her bill. She'll just wait until she gets home and use her PC or tablet (her tablet with no connection to a cell network.) I can't say that I blame her at all. It's very liberating to use devices that aren't locked into a "plan" that could go ape shit at any moment and cost you hundreds of dollars.

These are not simple "little" apps , they require the whole power of Google's infrastructure of servers and services to run. you cannot simply replace them with your own like Apple demonstrated with Maps.

and these apps are what made Android and define Android for its users.

these are the 'software' features the users want in their phone and only Google control them and they're not open-sourced.

Google could just offer OEMs a larger kickback/lower fee for selling straight Android instead of embellishing with a custom presentation layer.

Also offer incentives for following HW guidelines, like button layout or placement, as well as bundling of Google Services.

Finally offer something like $1 per phone for every OS update pushed through to 'share the wealth' of providing a large and modern install base.

Kickback? Fee? Manufacturers don't pay Google a dime for Android. It's open source, and given away for free by Google. The manufacturers make money on the hardware (and any associated subscription services used by their devices), and Google makes money by serving ads to anyone using Google services (Search, Maps, Gmail, Youtube, etc.).

Google services are not free for OEMs. I remember reading somewhere that for them to use Maps and sport Google's brands, they had to pay Google.

Google could just offer OEMs a larger kickback/lower fee for selling straight Android instead of embellishing with a custom presentation layer.

Also offer incentives for following HW guidelines, like button layout or placement, as well as bundling of Google Services.

Finally offer something like $1 per phone for every OS update pushed through to 'share the wealth' of providing a large and modern install base.

Kickback? Fee? Manufacturers don't pay Google a dime for Android. It's open source, and given away for free by Google. The manufacturers make money on the hardware (and any associated subscription services used by their devices), and Google makes money by serving ads to anyone using Google services (Search, Maps, Gmail, Youtube, etc.).

These are not simple "little" apps , they require the whole power of Google's infrastructure of servers and services to run. you cannot simply replace them with your own like Apple demonstrated with Maps.

and these apps are what made Android and define Android for its users.

these are the 'software' features the users want in their phone and only Google control them and they're not open-sourced.

try selling an Android phone without the playstore a

Amazon does that, albeit for tablets, but nothing prevent them from doing the same or providing their App Store for any of Androids' OEMs.

If Google wants to try to influence the android landscape with Motorola the first thing they need to do, at least in the US, is stop making most of their phones Verizon exclusives. That, more than anything, is limiting their market share. With Verizon being your only carrier for your phones you are automatically limited in market share to the market share of Verizon instead of a portion of the total market. The Droid Razor and Droid Razor Maxx weren't bad phones when they were released and the Maxx is pretty unique as far as battery life goes.

Ditching the Motoblur or what every Motorola is calling their current skin would be the next obvious step. Ensuring that they all receive updates would also be good. Essentially make them nexus phones on the software side with out necessarily using the nexus branding or tying the hardware releases to new os releases.

Perhaps it doesn't matter what people call their devices. After all, most people say, check out my iPad or my Mac, not my iOS device. Most people don't say, "look at my Windows computer," they call it something generic or refer to the brand. What matters in these situations is what OS is on these things. Apple and Google get their App stores and ad revenue, MS sells its licenses. The OS kinda seems like a transparent part of a device these days.

The OEM customizations are still pretty universally terrible and superficial. Despite their best efforts, they can barely re-skin Android and release new versions in a timely manner. Add in the Google applications and Play, and there's no danger of Google getting pushed out anytime soon. Amazon is the only "competitor" that even comes close, and as much as I love Amazon, their Android stuff is still very second rate and limited (which is mostly fine for what's primarily a reading device).

I ordered Nexus 7 with fairy low expectations - it's my first Android device so I wanted a "pure" Android that I can update and all that - but it's not so bad. The hardware is nice and the OS needs some polish but I was really pleasantly surprised.

Xavin wrote:

The OEM customizations are still pretty universally terrible and superficial. Despite their best efforts, they can barely re-skin Android and release new versions in a timely manner. Add in the Google applications and Play, and there's no danger of Google getting pushed out anytime soon. Amazon is the only "competitor" that even comes close, and as much as I love Amazon, their Android stuff is still very second rate and limited (which is mostly fine for what's primarily a reading device).

I'm also appalled that that many Android devices still ship with outdated OS and often without the possibility to upgrade it.

I've owned most major (Samsung) devices since the Galaxy S and there's never been a problem getting very functional "Alternate ROMs" that have all the advantages of the Nexus phones but also include a microSD slot. The worst was GPS support on the Galaxy S, but that hardly worked with the stock ROM. Cameras have always worked and the S-pen had better support in Cyanogenmod than the stock ROM for the Note (it supported hovering cursor).

If you're someone who cares about getting the best possible Android then Cyanogenmod and its friends won't let you down.

That's pretty true, but it does involve doing a bit of research first. Samsung phones do usually have excellent ROMs, and with the way Sony are moving (even into AOSP itself!) I would be inclined to think their handsets moving forward should have excellent stable ROMs also. Although, having used a few recent Xperia's I have to say it is easily the closest major OEM skin to stock android, miles and miles removed from that awful Timescape nonsense back in the X10 days.

A big problem with custom ROMs is that I've found people tend to install whatever looks good, not realizing that finding a good stable ROM involves a little more reading and thought. If you've gone to trouble of rooting your phone, then it's wise to forgo the beta ROMs and latest Android version in favour of something more stable unless you're willing to live on the bleeding edge like many.